search results matching tag: hazardous

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (119)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (7)     Comments (479)   

Squirrel jumps on UPS delivery man

StukaFox says...

I gotta squirrel story.
So when I lived in Mountain View, for Christ only knows what reason, the idiots in charge of power put this big-ass transformer thing on the corner of my property. The thing hummed with menace and I knew that shit wasn't right. But I didn't worry none because there was a big green metal cover over it that provided the same protection against horrendous death that a box of Kleenex would have provided the World Trade Center on 9/11.
One day, I'm standing on my balcony and drinking a beer. I mighta been stoned, too, only there's no 'mighta' that day. I'm watching the whorehouse across the street (really) and generally buzzing when I see a squirrel on the lawn. I hate squirrels. A motherfucking squirrel ate my bar fridge and fucked me outta the $50 I was selling it for on Craigslist (really).
Anyway, I got this longneck of Bud in hand and I'm working out whether I can brain the goddamn rodent with it when the neighbor's cat come rippin' ass from under the balcony and goes after Skippy.
Well here's some amusement!
The squirrel is running for it's pointless life and the cat is banking like a F-16 chasing an Iraqi MIG and I've already got $10 down on the kitty with a $3 over/under. I already know how this was gonna end and I was rootin' for it every step of the way.
Only it didn't.
The goddamn squirrel found the ONE way to get under that green metal cover I mentioned previously. The cat stops in amazement and I'm all pissed because I've been gypped outta Wild Kingdom's money shot.
A second later there's a flash like Ivy Mike going off from under the cover and an a concussive BOOM!! The fucking cover blasts off like a Space-X project gone horribly wrong -- or, in this case, delightfully right.
The cat jumps like 5 feet in the air and an arc of turds flies outta its butt, the cover returns to earth as a traffic hazard in the middle of Latham St., and the squirrel is basically vaporized. And now I'm the happiest motherfucker in Mountain View because dude, that shit was AWESOME!
I call out, "Babe! You won't believe what just happened!" 'cause you gotta totally share shit like that.
Then I realized everything is TOTALLY silent, like Little House on the Fucking Prairie silent.
"The power's out," my wife responds.
And it STAYED out for like two goddamn days while the putzes from the power company had to rewire pretty much everything that blew up.
Honey Badger didn't give a shit because Honey Badger'd copped an oz right before this shit happened. And as Fat Freddy taught us, "Dope will get you through times of no power better than power will get you through times of no dope." Or some shit like that. I dunno, I'm totally fucking baked right now.

DESPERATE Restaurant Owner BLOCKADES Inspector's Car

newtboy says...

By that assessment, every drug dealer, thief, and Nigerian prince should have the same right to “protest” by physically trapping police in their place and blocking traffic without repercussions.
He could not legally be open, so he was being a criminal to get the money to pay these people and bills, just like a heroin dealer.
He was being stopped from breaking the law and causing a deadly public health hazard. His reaction, break more laws and fight police. My question is, why didn’t they throw him to the ground when he refused to comply and argued and then taze or shoot him when he resisted? Sadly, I only see one reason, he’s a white guy. I think if he were black 1. Bob would no longer see this as a hero standing up for his rights but a thug flaunting the law and “fighting” police and 2. The police would react quite differently.

BSR said:

Actually I saw a man protesting and arguing with police, not complying, because he was going to be stopped from paying his staff and his bills and his truck payment. Something he may be facing for the first time in his life.

I make no judgment about the rest of your analogy. I'm not very good cynic.

Ken Dilanian Swears Live on MSNBC

Flushing 240lbs of liquid mercury

moonsammy says...

I really want to reach into mercury sometime. I bet that feels *bizarre*...

That ending line. Dude is certainly not in denial about the hazards here!

Dr Drew's Horrific Coronavirus Advice Compilation

newtboy says...

Nope.
Trump denied there was any danger from the beginning, no significant or hazardous infection in America, and insisted it would miraculously disappear by April. Last week he suggested ending stay at home orders next weekend! Batshit crazy and criminally ignorant at best, intentional attempted mass homicide at worst.

Trump didn't stop flights from China, airlines did. Trump restricted travel for non citizens (except family of citizens) coming from China Jan 31, well after most flights were cancelled, and only when faced with the uniform recommendation of the career public health officials at HHS.

What preparations? They seemed to start those last week, not in February, and certainly not before. Most temporary hospitals are still in the planning stage, not built or stocked, and completely unstaffed. Stockpiles were not full or being filled. It seems they weren't even making plans, just denials.

The racist part was Trump and his subordinates calling it the Chinese flu and Kung Flu.

The loudest and latest one saying it was like any flu and not a problem was Trump, here's a clip of that from less than one month ago, try again.

https://youtu.be/xcDq1jUAuI4

Trump should not have dismantled the systems in place that made us more prepared, nor should he have underfunded and defunded the health programs and organizations so vital right now, nor should he have ignored the impacts other countries were suffering and, instead of preparing, downplayed the unfolding crisis while dragging his feet on any responses, or refused WHO tests that worked in S Korea in favor of nonexistent American tests that at first didn't work at all, couldn't be mass produced so are STILL in short supply, and now seem to give false negatives 1/3 of the time because the manufacturer donated $1.5 million, but he did.

China lied and minimized (sounds familiar) until mid January, yes, but Trump dismantled the CDC Pandemic Preparedness program that was designed to protect us from exactly that likelihood...that is their M. O.. Remember, the whistle blower went public in mid December, but Trump and co. ignored it, accepting China's obvious lies. The CDCPPP could not only have verified his claims, but could have sounded the alarm earlier. (Think Brad Pitt in WWZ)

Trump calls the Chinese liars and thieves, then bases his policies on what they tell him with no method or effort to confirm it, then denies any responsibility?! Trump STILL called it the flu less than 1 month ago. Who is he blaming for hiding the truth from him until then?

bobknight33 said:

Trump was right from the beginning, Assembling a team , stopping china flights and starting preparations for this. The media countered with racist against China, Fool this is just another flu type event.

Now its 24hrs a day panic panic fear mongering from media and Trump should have prepared.

China lied and knew person to person spread back in mid December. The WHO carried the lies of China.

Security Door

God damnit Chug.

newtboy says...

Certainly? You shouldn't try to speak for everyone. You don't have any idea how many people like pilk and or dilk. ;-)
I think most adult people are offput at the thought of drinking human milk, but it's undeniably healthy, and almost everyone has done it.

There actually is a highly regarded chef working on pig milk cheese who claims it's delicious, it's not the milk that's the problem there, it's the milking. Sows are not docile and don't have easily milked teats. Same for bitches (female dogs). If they had udders, there would definitely be cultures milking them.

Mongols created an empire from near nothing in part by drinking large quantities of milk, even though it seems they were likely all lactose intolerant when that started. They found it worth the discomfort.
The Massai also owe their existence to drinking milk, and they seem exceptionally healthy.

While it's true, most of the world doesn't NEED milk, they do need calcium and milk may be the only source available when calcium rich vegetables aren't. From precursory research it seems a majority of people around the world do drink some milk, but not enough to meet daily calcium recommendations.

I'll hazard a guess based on your comments that you're vegan. Please don't be a stereotype and food shame non vegans, especially if you're going to be fast and loose with facts to do it.

HerbWatson said:

Well milk is bovine

Large populations of our species just has got it's milks mixed up.

Certainly the thought of pig milk, or dog milk would make any person retch, but we've been conditioned to think that for some reason cows milk is also for us. So much so that we'll kill this little fellow just get his mother's milk. Of course we'll kill her too once her milk no longer flows economically enough. We'll hide it and call it humane to make ourselves feel like good civilised people, even perhaps decide that we need milk, even though most of the world doesn't and is healthier for it.

School coach Keanon Lowe disarms student

newtboy says...

I agree. His plan was to traumatize the entire class with his in your face suicide....assuming they have the story correct.
Pretending he was only going to harm himself, so deserves compassion, is not being honest or rational, imo.
I'm glad no one was hurt, but he definitely intended to severely hurt everyone in that classroom emotionally. I would hazard a guess that he expected some of them to be traumatized enough to follow his example. In school suicides often lead to more suicides.

viewer_999 said:

Yeah, maybe I'm lacking compassion, but fuck compassion. You bring a gun to a classroom, your freedom is forfeit. Give him all the care you want to, apart from society. It's stupid to risk countless lives and loves of people who aren't deranged to coddle the feelings of one who is.
He'll be back.

Out Of Gas

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

I didn't call you dumb. I warned you that if you were to do something (future tense possibility) then the result would be that you were being dumb.

Do you get how that works? There are multiple future possibilities, I don't want one to happen so I warn against it. This is not a difficult concept so I am at a loss as to why you don't understand it.

There was nothing in your previous correspondence to suggest that it would be a statement referring to a past tense behavior. You unfortunately assumed it to be referring to past tense behaviour. If you had doubt as to what I was referring to you could have just asked. I.e. if you read it and went "does he mean past tense or future tense? There isn't any past tense behaviour he could be referring to, so logically it must be future tense. I'm still confused though", you could have just asked which it was.

I believe any restrictions on the 2A have been justified by the supreme court. So they believe it was within the scope of what the founders intended. That is how.

"Hazard a guess" and "assume" are two different things.

Hazard a guess means to admit you don't know what is true but that with the given information you will gamble on an outcome (with full disclosure that it could be wrong).

Assume means to presume something is true, without any proof that it is.

You're welcome.

wtfcaniuse said:

You "warned" me by calling me dumb for assuming something that I didn't assume, at all, in any way, shape or form.

If the second amendment prevents the government from doing anything relating to bearing arms then why have they repeatedly been able to do things related to gun and weapon control?

You're going to hazard a guess, seems a bit like assuming something to me...

"it would be dumb to make any assumptions"

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

wtfcaniuse says...

You "warned" me by calling me dumb for assuming something that I didn't assume, at all, in any way, shape or form.

If the second amendment prevents the government from doing anything relating to bearing arms then why have they repeatedly been able to do things related to gun and weapon control?

You're going to hazard a guess, seems a bit like assuming something to me...

"it would be dumb to make any assumptions"

harlequinn said:

Following on from above.

I didn't say you quoted me or anything about me. It was a "warning". My argument might have lead people to believe that I was against gun control. I gave the warning that it would be dumb to make any assumptions. I can't quite see how you missed this.

If you think it is not dumb to make assumptions, please let me know.

The 2A specifically says "arms". There is plenty of debate and case law regarding what arms they meant. Suffice to say there isn't a shadow of a doubt that it means firearms (long and short) of all varieties commonly available.

"doesn't mention anything about not restricting the types of armaments people can use"

It does restrict the government from making laws in this regard. The 2A is a law restricting government, not the people. "shall not be infringed" literally means you shall make no law that affects this right in any way.

You don't know whether advocates care if other arms are regulated. If I were to hazard a guess I'd say you are very wrong.

Gun control means whatever the group in control wants it to mean. Anything else is false. If they want it to mean taking away all of your guns, then that is what it is.

Constitutional amendments can indeed be changed. It is very, very difficult to do:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

Following on from above.

I didn't say you quoted me or anything about me. It was a "warning". My argument might have lead people to believe that I was against gun control. I gave the warning that it would be dumb to make any assumptions. I can't quite see how you missed this.

If you think it is not dumb to make assumptions, please let me know.

The 2A specifically says "arms". There is plenty of debate and case law regarding what arms they meant. Suffice to say there isn't a shadow of a doubt that it means firearms (long and short) of all varieties commonly available.

"doesn't mention anything about not restricting the types of armaments people can use"

It does restrict the government from making laws in this regard. The 2A is a law restricting government, not the people. "shall not be infringed" literally means you shall make no law that affects this right in any way.

You don't know whether advocates care if other arms are regulated. If I were to hazard a guess I'd say you are very wrong.

Gun control means whatever the group in control wants it to mean. Anything else is false. If they want it to mean taking away all of your guns, then that is what it is.

Constitutional amendments can indeed be changed. It is very, very difficult to do:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

wtfcaniuse said:

Firstly I didn't quote you, I didn't assume anything about you, I didn't mention you or your previous comments at all.

Secondly the second amendment doesn't specify guns and doesn't mention anything about not restricting the types of armaments people can use. It's funny how many gun rights advocates don't care if their knives, tasers, knuckle dusters and pepper sprays are regulated and controlled.

Thirdly Gun control doesn't equate to taking all your guns away.

Lastly constitutional amendments can be repealed and changed.

Why Shell's Marketing is so Disgusting

newtboy says...

Almost as stupid as holding the producers of the toxic product AND the misleading or outright false information about it's hazards blameless. Because they actively misled their customers, I give them the vast lions share of blame, but maybe not 100%. There's plenty to go around.

You don't have to live in poverty to abandon fossil fuels.
Not.
Even.
Close.
I bought solar 10+- years back...it paid for itself in 8. It's lifespan is 20+-. I get 12 years of free electricity for abandoning that portion, with no blackouts, no brownouts, and no rate increases.

True, the video could be better at sharing the blame, but it stayed on topic instead, that topic being major polluters greenwashing their mage. I didn't take it as assigning ALL blame to one source, just not allowing the worst offenders to shirk all responsibility for their products.


Every one of these is the likely outcome of any anthropogenic rise over 2-3C because of feedback loops that drive us to 6-12C rise. Only the wars are likely this century, but I didn't put a timeframe on those outcomes. 140 million + will be displaced by just a 3' rise, which is all but guaranteed by 2100 under the most optimistic current projections.
That wipes out mangroves and other fish nurseries, further impacting the struggling ocean food webs. All the while it accelerates as our ability to cope erodes like the shorelines....it doesn't just halt at 3' rise.
The natural food webs on land are also struggling, and are unlikely to survive ocean collapse.

Not just from deforestation, but diatoms are near a point of collapse from ocean acidification. https://diatoms.org/what-are-diatoms. That's over 1/2....and the base of the ocean food web.


Since the IPCC (again, known for overly conservative estimates) now says at current rates we could hit as much as a 6C rise by 2100, and rates of emissions are rising as fast as carbon sinks are shrinking, they're not just a possibility, they a likelihood in the near future....but granted the hydrogen sulfide clouds are far in a worst case scenario future, far from guaranteed.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

Walking backwards to simplify, my main point is that simply blaming ALL fossil fuel usage on the company providing the fossil fuel is stupid and misleading in the extreme. We don't see millions of people willingly abandoning fossil fuels and living in abject poverty to save the world, instead they are all very willing and eagerly buying them and this video lets all those people off the hook. This video lets everybody keep using fossil fuels, and at the same time pointing the finger at Shell and saying it's all their fault. It's an extremely detrimental piece of disinformation.

"explain what, specifically, I claimed that's not supported by the science."
-Complete collapse of the food web
-Wars over hundreds of millions or billions of refugees
-Loss of most farm land and hundreds of major cities to the sea
-Loss of well over 1/2 the producers of O2
-Eventual clouds of hydrogen sulfide from the ocean covering the land
-Runaway greenhouse cycles making the planet uninhabitable for thousands if not hundreds of thousands or even millions of years

People who annoy you

Denied!

newtboy says...

I'd say garbage truck helped in either case.

If van, like black car, was just trying to cheat traffic by driving dangerously, blocking it was proper.
If it's an emergency, and there's no clear indication it was like having their hazards on, garbage truck helped by getting a police escort before they had a wreck weaving dangerously through heavy traffic.
There's also a good possibility that the van was trying to escape the police, and that garbage truck helped catch them.

According to the YT description, there was no one else in the van, just an impatient driver.

cloudballoon said:

That'd be my thought too. If I'd the dump truck guy, I'd look in the rearview mirror looking for signs of emergency. If the driver is pleading then just let guy through... which looks like is the case. Maybe.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon